Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Go 1.11 Rc1 released

golang.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 29 posts

Re: Go 1.11 Rc1 released

#11

Post by ovao »

irfansharif wrote: post #8
shawn wrote: post #4

Go is still one of the most difficult and counter intuitive build systems ever devised. Usually you’d expect a project to build out of the box. Go seems to take a stance of “Haha nope, get ready to figure out which version of the standard library this 4 month old project was written against, then have fun trying to update it to the latest.” I like the language though. Their green threads are still the best.

From Go's 1.0 compatibility guarantee[0]: > It is intended that programs written to the Go 1 specification will continue to compile and run correctly, unchanged, over the lifetime of that specification. [...] Go programs that work today should continue to work even as future "point" releases of Go 1 arise (Go 1.1, Go 1.2, etc.). I've found this to be upheld in practice, especially so for the standard library. I have…

My experience has been the same, so it’s hard to understand where shawn is coming from. There have been impressively few breaking changes to the Go standard library since 1.0.

Even when bringing in a number of third-party packages, the only trouble I’ve had building Go projects has been in Windows (which is often treated by Gophers as a second-class platform).

Re: Go 1.11 Rc1 released

#13

Post by shawn »

Walkman wrote: post #10
shawn wrote: post #4

Go is still one of the most difficult and counter intuitive build systems ever devised. Usually you’d expect a project to build out of the box. Go seems to take a stance of “Haha nope, get ready to figure out which version of the standard library this 4 month old project was written against, then have fun trying to update it to the latest.” I like the language though. Their green threads are still the best.

Can you tell at least one specific example where they broke the standard library?

It figures that my critique would be undermined by the choice of a single word.

Look, maybe the stdlib is rock solid. But every time I try to build a Go project, `go build` finds ten ways not to work.

Case in point: https://github.com/cretz/tor-dht-poc

Try building this. I have no idea what's wrong with it, but it doesn't work. It's cool tech, I want it, but I don't want to immerse myself in the world of hurt^WGo just to get it.

I did however at least attempt to fix the problem: https://github.com/cretz/tor-dht-poc/pull/2

Re: Go 1.11 Rc1 released

#14

Post by latchkey »

shawn wrote: post #13
Walkman wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you tell at least one specific example where they broke the standard library?

It figures that my critique would be undermined by the choice of a single word. Look, maybe the stdlib is rock solid. But every time I try to build a Go project, `go build` finds ten ways not to work. Case in point: https://github.com/cretz/tor-dht-poc Try building this. I have no idea what's wrong with it, but it doesn't work. It's cool tech, I want it, but I don't want to immerse myself in the world of hurt^WGo jus…

The 'problem' is that the authors did not use dep (soon to be modules) and add the Gopkg.[toml|lock] files.

Re: Go 1.11 Rc1 released

#15

Post by Walkman »

shawn wrote: post #13
Walkman wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you tell at least one specific example where they broke the standard library?

It figures that my critique would be undermined by the choice of a single word. Look, maybe the stdlib is rock solid. But every time I try to build a Go project, `go build` finds ten ways not to work. Case in point: https://github.com/cretz/tor-dht-poc Try building this. I have no idea what's wrong with it, but it doesn't work. It's cool tech, I want it, but I don't want to immerse myself in the world of hurt^WGo jus…

It has nothing to do with Go the language itself. There are tools for that and lazy authors have the same problem with other languages also.

Re: Go 1.11 Rc1 released

#17

Post by imrehg »

agnivade wrote: post #16

There has been some tremendous improvements for ARM architecture. If you run some serious code on raspberry PIs, get ready to be amazed.

I skimmed the release notes, and only a little mention there ARM specific changes, can you elaborate on what tremendous improvements are made? Very curious!

Re: Go 1.11 Rc1 released

#18

Post by mathw »

latchkey wrote: post #14
shawn wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It figures that my critique would be undermined by the choice of a single word. Look, maybe the stdlib is rock solid. But every time I try to build a Go project, `go build` finds ten ways not to work. Case in point: https://github.com/cretz/tor-dht-poc Try building this. I have no idea what's wrong with it, but it doesn't work. It's cool tech, I want it, but I don't want to immerse myself in the world of hurt^WGo jus…

The 'problem' is that the authors did not use dep (soon to be modules) and add the Gopkg.[toml|lock] files.

Or that such tools aren't shipped and part of the standard Go experience.

Fortunately that's changing.

Re: Go 1.11 Rc1 released

#20

Post by latchkey »

mathw wrote: post #18
latchkey wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The 'problem' is that the authors did not use dep (soon to be modules) and add the Gopkg.[toml|lock] files.

Or that such tools aren't shipped and part of the standard Go experience. Fortunately that's changing.

ant, maven and gradle are not shipped with the JVM, yet the java community figures out how to do a build system somehow.
Post reply on HN